|
Post by DKTrav88 on Apr 24, 2018 0:16:23 GMT
www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.htmlThe doctrine of apostolic succession is the belief that the 12 apostles passed on their authority to successors, who then passed the apostolic authority on to their successors, continuing throughout the centuries, even unto today. The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the leader of the apostles, with the greatest authority, and therefore his successors carry on the greatest authority. The Roman Catholic Church combines this belief with the concept that Peter later became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishops that followed Peter were accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. Apostolic succession, combined with Peter’s supremacy among the apostles, results in the Roman bishop being the supreme authority of the Catholic Church – the Pope. However, nowhere in Scripture did Jesus, the apostles, or any other New Testament writer set forth the idea of “apostolic succession.” Further, neither is Peter presented as “supreme” over the other apostles. The apostle Paul, in fact, rebukes Peter when Peter was leading others astray (Galatians 2:11-14). Yes, the apostle Peter had a prominent role. Yes, perhaps the apostle Peter was the leader of the apostles (although the book of Acts records the apostle Paul and Jesus’ brother James as also having prominent leadership roles). Whatever the case, Peter was not the “commander” or supreme authority over the other apostles. Even if apostolic succession could be demonstrated from Scripture, which it cannot, apostolic succession would not result in Peter’s successors being absolutely supreme over the other apostles’ successors. Catholics point to Matthias being chosen to replace Judas as the twelfth apostle in Acts chapter 1 as an example of apostolic succession. While Matthias did indeed “succeed” Judas as an apostle, this is in no sense an argument for continuing apostolic succession. Matthias being chosen to replace Judas is only an argument for the church replacing ungodly and unfaithful leaders (such as Judas) with godly and faithful leaders (such as Matthias). Nowhere in the New Testament are any of the twelve apostles recorded as passing on their apostolic authority to successors. Nowhere do any of the apostles predict that they will pass on their apostolic authority. No, Jesus ordained the apostles to build the foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20). What is the foundation of the church that the apostles built? The New Testament – the record of the deeds and teachings of the apostles. The church does not need apostolic successors. The church needs the teachings of the apostles accurately recorded and preserved. And that is exactly what God has provided in His Word (Ephesians 1:13; Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 2:15; 4:2). In short, apostolic succession is not biblical. The concept of apostolic succession is never found in Scripture. What is found in Scripture is that the true church will teach what the Scriptures teach and will compare all doctrines and practices to Scripture in order to determine what is true and right. The Roman Catholic Church claims that a lack of ongoing apostolic authority results in doctrinal confusion and chaos. It is an unfortunate truth (that the apostles acknowledged) that false teachers would arise (2 Peter 2:1). Admittedly, the lack of “supreme authority” among non-Catholic churches results in many different interpretations of the Bible. However, these differences in interpretation are not the result of Scripture being unclear. Rather, they are the result of even non-Catholic Christians carrying on the Catholic tradition of interpreting Scripture in accordance with their own traditions. If Scripture is studied in its entirety and in its proper context, the truth can be easily determined. Doctrinal differences and denominational conflicts are a result of some Christians refusing to agree with what Scripture says – not a result of there being no “supreme authority” to interpret Scripture. Alignment with scriptural teaching, not apostolic succession, is the determining factor of the trueness of a church. What is mentioned in Scripture is the idea that the Word of God was to be the guide that the church was to follow (Acts 20:32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17). It is the Scriptures that teachings are to be compared with (Acts 17:10-12). Apostolic authority was passed on through the writings of the apostles, not through apostolic succession.
|
|
KGrim
Full Member
Coming back to Arktos...for a little while anyways...just to see how things are doing.
Posts: 442
Likes: 238
Country: USA
Region: South East
Location: East Texas
Ancestry: Scotch-Irish
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Eastern Orthodox
Hero: Jesus
Age: 33 soon to be 34
Philosophy: Hesychasm
|
Post by KGrim on Nov 7, 2019 5:20:12 GMT
Yes. And they are right.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Nov 7, 2019 5:37:24 GMT
And this is you making your church the sole authority in your life.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Nov 7, 2019 6:51:44 GMT
And this is you making your church the sole authority in your life. Sola scriptura is not biblical neither is contextual interpretation. The formation of the bible was developed using non-biblical methods.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Nov 7, 2019 13:34:25 GMT
www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.htmlThe doctrine of apostolic succession is the belief that the 12 apostles passed on their authority to successors, who then passed the apostolic authority on to their successors, continuing throughout the centuries, even unto today. The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the leader of the apostles, with the greatest authority, and therefore his successors carry on the greatest authority. The Roman Catholic Church combines this belief with the concept that Peter later became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishops that followed Peter were accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. Apostolic succession, combined with Peter’s supremacy among the apostles, results in the Roman bishop being the supreme authority of the Catholic Church – the Pope. However, nowhere in Scripture did Jesus, the apostles, or any other New Testament writer set forth the idea of “apostolic succession.” Further, neither is Peter presented as “supreme” over the other apostles. The apostle Paul, in fact, rebukes Peter when Peter was leading others astray (Galatians 2:11-14). Yes, the apostle Peter had a prominent role. Yes, perhaps the apostle Peter was the leader of the apostles (although the book of Acts records the apostle Paul and Jesus’ brother James as also having prominent leadership roles). Whatever the case, Peter was not the “commander” or supreme authority over the other apostles. Even if apostolic succession could be demonstrated from Scripture, which it cannot, apostolic succession would not result in Peter’s successors being absolutely supreme over the other apostles’ successors. Catholics point to Matthias being chosen to replace Judas as the twelfth apostle in Acts chapter 1 as an example of apostolic succession. While Matthias did indeed “succeed” Judas as an apostle, this is in no sense an argument for continuing apostolic succession. Matthias being chosen to replace Judas is only an argument for the church replacing ungodly and unfaithful leaders (such as Judas) with godly and faithful leaders (such as Matthias). Nowhere in the New Testament are any of the twelve apostles recorded as passing on their apostolic authority to successors. Nowhere do any of the apostles predict that they will pass on their apostolic authority. No, Jesus ordained the apostles to build the foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20). What is the foundation of the church that the apostles built? The New Testament – the record of the deeds and teachings of the apostles. The church does not need apostolic successors. The church needs the teachings of the apostles accurately recorded and preserved. And that is exactly what God has provided in His Word (Ephesians 1:13; Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 2:15; 4:2). In short, apostolic succession is not biblical. The concept of apostolic succession is never found in Scripture. What is found in Scripture is that the true church will teach what the Scriptures teach and will compare all doctrines and practices to Scripture in order to determine what is true and right. The Roman Catholic Church claims that a lack of ongoing apostolic authority results in doctrinal confusion and chaos. It is an unfortunate truth (that the apostles acknowledged) that false teachers would arise (2 Peter 2:1). Admittedly, the lack of “supreme authority” among non-Catholic churches results in many different interpretations of the Bible. However, these differences in interpretation are not the result of Scripture being unclear. Rather, they are the result of even non-Catholic Christians carrying on the Catholic tradition of interpreting Scripture in accordance with their own traditions. If Scripture is studied in its entirety and in its proper context, the truth can be easily determined. Doctrinal differences and denominational conflicts are a result of some Christians refusing to agree with what Scripture says – not a result of there being no “supreme authority” to interpret Scripture. Alignment with scriptural teaching, not apostolic succession, is the determining factor of the trueness of a church. What is mentioned in Scripture is the idea that the Word of God was to be the guide that the church was to follow (Acts 20:32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17). It is the Scriptures that teachings are to be compared with (Acts 17:10-12). Apostolic authority was passed on through the writings of the apostles, not through apostolic succession. You think that the church must be based on the bible, but as an Orthodox Christian I know that the Bible is based on the Church, because it was the Church that wrote the Bible. Even Paul agrees when he says "But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." (1 Tim 3:15) Note that he did not say that the bible was the pillar and ground of the truth, but that the church was. Orthodox Christians in this days read this Epistle of Paul. old.bibleonline.ru/bible/eng/58/01/ Paul speaks here abouth the Church. Of course the Church is not God, but as it is written the Body of Christ. Christ is his head and he governs the Church all the days. The problem with the non-recognition of Apostolic succession by some people is that the Apostles are given the power to forgive sins, as written in Scripture (St. John 20:23) And - 9. What has been is to be; and what has been done is to be done, and there is nothing new under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 1: 9) And you're certainly right that only the Church is worth our trust. That's what the Bible says.
|
|
KGrim
Full Member
Coming back to Arktos...for a little while anyways...just to see how things are doing.
Posts: 442
Likes: 238
Country: USA
Region: South East
Location: East Texas
Ancestry: Scotch-Irish
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Eastern Orthodox
Hero: Jesus
Age: 33 soon to be 34
Philosophy: Hesychasm
|
Post by KGrim on Nov 7, 2019 21:21:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Nov 7, 2019 21:33:51 GMT
Jesus gave the Church authority. "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen and a publican." (Matt 18:17) You neglect to hear the church and lean on your own interpretation of scripture. It's a matter of determination. Actually, apostles the evangelists were the ones which had been brought us His teachings, and his bless. You can't say "I saw Jesus", because if you do, you're a liar. Apostles saw Him and wrote about it. We believe firstly to the apostles. Yes, Jesus is the one Who's the basis of the Church, but the order of obedience is not less important for us to do well. This might be clearly viewed here: a) you've been heard of Jesus from someone (I don't know who were they), else, or b) Jesus Himself. In case (a) you have to trust them if what you've been heard seem true to you; in case (b) you supposedly have some kind of mysterious visions. Agree, there's not much trustful situation in case of (b). Well, Apostolic succession - thinking by the same logic further - is absolutely canonical.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Nov 8, 2019 4:41:06 GMT
A cult would say the same thing, "if you're not part of my church then you're a heathen".
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Nov 8, 2019 6:28:00 GMT
A cult would say the same thing, "if you're not part of my church then you're a heathen". But that is exactly what you say, the "church" being those who follow scripture.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Nov 8, 2019 7:02:27 GMT
A cult would say the same thing, "if you're not part of my church then you're a heathen". But that is exactly what you say, the "church" being those who follow scripture. You're a Roman Catholic if I'm not mistaken?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2019 7:46:56 GMT
But that is exactly what you say, the "church" being those who follow scripture. You're a Roman Catholic if I'm not mistaken? That's why succession
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2019 7:49:04 GMT
It's the same thing, people in power driving and manipulating texts, that who will be the next in line who would be 'SERVING' them.
Do church and bishops really care about a devout?
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Nov 8, 2019 9:47:38 GMT
But that is exactly what you say, the "church" being those who follow scripture. You're a Roman Catholic if I'm not mistaken? No.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Nov 8, 2019 9:48:22 GMT
It's the same thing, people in power driving and manipulating texts, that who will be the next in line who would be 'SERVING' them. Do church and bishops really care about a devout? Do the devout really care about the devout?
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Nov 8, 2019 11:56:00 GMT
A cult would say the same thing, "if you're not part of my church then you're a heathen". But that is exactly what you say, the "church" being those who follow scripture. My church isn't a single institution or denomination, like he is saying his is.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Nov 8, 2019 16:42:12 GMT
"And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it," (Matt. 16:18).
Its just not possible that every situation in the infinite future can be completely covered by the Bible.
Most obvious are questions on Astronomy and Genetics.
But fundamental general principles can be covered, the most clear being against hypocrisy - which is essentially about contradictions.
So for the pope to endorse the kissing of rings - symbols of wealth - is contrary, sure.
As it is the Bible is not infallible either, because the words it uses have gone through many translations and re-wording.
|
|